Every time I look at the 'flex-flow' property, I get a headache. I
think there are too many options there. You can specify the flow
directions purely logically, purely physically, or an interesting
mixture of the two.
I've already logged an issue in the spec about dropping the mixed
physical/logical options, so we have only the all-logical and
all-physical ones. That would significantly simplify the syntax
without, I think, actually killing any useful options.
Can we go further? Grid Layout doesn't care about your pitiful
physical direction - the orientation and direction of rows and columns
are *always* tied directly to logical directions. 'flex-flow' would
be *so* much nicer if we could do the same:
flex-flow: [ row | row-reverse | column | column-reverse ]
[ wrap | wrap-reverse ]?
*Are* there any significant use-cases that aren't addressed by this?
If so, why aren't these problems with Grid Layout as well?
~TJ